The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-05-19

der was to have any inality, it would be proper
that the investigation should afford OPP
portunity for hearing 70 parties
who opposed as well as to those
who favored the application. This would re-
quire considerable time in every case and had
the commission made no order except upon full
and final hearing. the majority or Applications
now on its file would. up TO this time, nave nee
essarily remained not acted upon. If the appli-
oatons were taken up in their order yours
would have been among those not yet reached
This fact is mentioned as showing that the CIV
ing of temporary relief in some other cases mas
not placed yours in any worse position than It
would necessarily have occupied II the tenn
porary orders had not been made.
.sThe commission, however. deemediit wise to
grant some temporary orders on an investiga-
ton not as complete as it expected finally 10
make. This was done in the belief that no con-
siderable mischief could follow from allowing an
existing condition of things remain for brief
period. whether it was then suffered to stand or
not, and that harmful results from sudden
change in the law might thereby, to some ex
tent, be averted. This course also gave the com
mission such an opportunity for careful study
of the system which Congress under
took to reform, as would t.a wise
left to operate universally. the old state OF
things would have been swept away At once, and
the commission, seeing only what had been SUP
stituted for it, woulG have been deprived OF the
best and most satisfactory means of making just
comparison Such a comparison was impor-
tant, not merely to enable it TO pass finally with
Iuil kuOWleQE6 UPON LHo eACepLiOHal CaSeSJ uus
also the better to prepare to make. in its period
ical reports, such suggestions and recommenda-
tions might naturally be looked for. The
commission felt that, whatever it was
action not less for permanence than Tor the
particular and special relief; and, without max
ing the vain effort to prevent all Injury, 1t
deemed itself fully justified in granting orders
of temporary suspension in some of the most
obvious cases and where special grounds for
urgency were shown. without first making the
T. 81 laov
other cases. not thought to be strong, the
affirmative showing. TO take the more deliberate
course. This method OF proceeding the commits
sion at the time believed had important ad-
vantaRes and il still believes will conduce to
the best results in the end.
You speak strongly and earnestly of the rea-
sons for granting your application. But in order
TO warrant it's being granted, it is not enough
that the application, If considered by itself, APP
pears to have merits. The commission must
consider in each case what effect the giving of
relief TO one applicant will have on other inter-
ests, and your knowledge of railroad matters
must enable you to perceive that in some sec
lions of the country the granting of one applca-
tion may affect the interests of other roads
70 create necessity for the like relief TO several
more, the satisfaction Of one claim begettine
others which are equally meritorious, until, if
all are satisfied, the exception becomes the rule.
But when such a result is probable, the reasons
for declining TO make any temporary order are
very conclusive. The commission cannot consent
deliberately TO enter upon highway where, to all
appearance, there will be no hating place within
the limits of its lawful jurisdiction. II a gen.
eral suspension of the long ud-snort hau clause
of the statute is not to be made by a single COM
prehensive measure, neither should the same
result be reached approached by the granting
of successive orders in individual cases. In
whatever the commission may do, it should
keep in view the preservation of the general rule.
cit is not our purpose, in this communication,
to express any opinion as to what ought to be
the final conclusion upon your application. The
commission is not yet prepared to give its de-
csion; and the purpose of this answer to your
telegram is merely to place before you some of
the reasons which, up this time, have pre-
cluded definite action. That injury results to
the parties interested in your road, to any
other person, is sincerely regretted, and your
belief that such is the case will be kept in mind
as reason for action prompt as, under the
circumstances. shall seem consistent with duty
In these views the whole conn mission concur
Every respectfully yours,
''T. M. COOLEY, Chairman"